Critique and alternative to the rational planning model in planning and policy analysis

The dominant paradigm used in planning and public policy analysis is the rational planning model. It fails to provide an understanding of land use planning observed in a case of the planning activities of a medium sized American City during a three year period because the activities of the planners and citizen participants were very different than those prescribed by the rational planning model.;The rational planning model is then analyzed to determine the reasons why it fails to provide an adequate understanding of planning practices. The study of planning theory used to explain the discrepancy between theory and practice focuses on different conceptions of rationality, including enlightenment, instrumental, objective, and substantive conceptions of rationality which are common in the planning literature. The alternative conception of communicative rationality associated with Jurgen Habermas is also explored.;The study shows the rational planning model provides an inadequate understanding of public policy analysis and planning because it presupposes a narrow conception of instrumental and objective rationality based on objective scientific knowledge rather than a knowledge that is based on the practical judgments of the community of fallible inquires whose understanding is conditional and who seek solutions to theory dependent problems under specific historical conditions. Further, it presupposes goals are to be determined using utilitarian criteria, but this excludes consideration of several deontological rights and is inconsistent with prevailing norms and values.;An alternative paradigm is suggested which presupposes several different conceptions of rationality including the communicative rationality associated with Habermas, and the advantages of the alternative paradigm for understanding policy analysis and planning is explored.